W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > February 2017

RE: OWL-Time - questions on Turtle file

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 23:08:12 +0000
To: <fd@w3.org>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <34dd0d0de2664409a91b14e702a2a3c9@exch1-mel.nexus.csiro.au>
1. The imports are not necessary. Help during authoring as it puts all the dc terms into the menus, but doesn't have to stay. 

2. Understand the informal convention, though it is unevenly applied. I guess if this is standard W3C style they could be added. 

3. Agree. 

I've actioned 1. And 3. But need to understand more about policy for 2. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org] 
Sent: Thursday, 2 February, 2017 04:03
To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: OWL-Time - questions on Turtle file

Looking at the Turtle serialization of the Time Ontology, I noticed that:

1. It has the following RDF statement: <http://www.w3.org/2006/time> owl:imports <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/>
The Ontology refers to DC terms (contributor, creator), which seems good, but why does it "import" DC elements?

2. There are no "rdfs:isDefinedBy" statements. More specifically, I was expecting to see "rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.w3.org/2006/time>" for each class and property in the ontology. Aren't they needed (or recommended) to link back classes and properties back to the ontology?

3. The "tzont" prefix is no longer used in the ontology and could be dropped (although I note it does appear in a couple of "historyNote" strings)


Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2017 23:08:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:29 UTC